Hi folks

It feels like I've not been at a show for months - mainly because a huge percentage of the Champ shows this year are being judged by all rounders instead of breed specialists and to be honest I really don't see the point of forking out over £20 for a 'non specialist' point of view. I wish that the bias was weighted more towards the those who own/breed/live with the breed they are judging rather than the usual endless merry go round of all rounder 'names'.

What do you lot think ?

Yvonne

Personally I think there are good and bad in both.   Breed judges especially those that show are quite often out to feather their own nest.  I have too often seen the you scratch my back I will scratch yours scenario and have actually stood and watched a breed judge look at the owners the first time a dog went round then the second time the dog.  I have always done better under all rounders in general because most although certainly not all are more interested in my dog than who is attached to the end of the lead. My dogs are not breed by faces neither does the stud dog owner show anymore so I never have someone pushing my dog as so many people do.  You are very lucky to have so many all rounders judging your breed as we have this year wish we had more!

With breed specialist there is bound to be a bias in favour of the type the breeder is producing or trying to produce as that will be what they interpret the standard as correct, so what seems like nepotism can in fact be honest opinion.  There will of course be some that seem to exchange favours if they are judges.

An example recently of a Husband and wife both giving CCs.  Their main winners were very similarily bred(they ahd same BCC), but the breeding was of dogs they had themselves admired and in fact chosen to own over the years (they own males so don't breed themselves).  Their opinions were entirely honest, and if anything they looked extra critically at the dogs whose type they admired.

Some all rounders actually face judge even more as they are aware only of the main players in a breed and even when they seem to do a reasonable job in the classes tyhey end up playing safe and putting up one of the know peoples big winners or new ones.  Often what they leave out of their line uyps is more telling than what is placed.

Totaly agree with Brainless on this - many specialist judges are berated for only awarding honours to dogs which, if most of the ringside actually thought about it carefully and knew what they were looking at it, would realise are of a distinct physical "mould" hence nearest that judge's interpretation of the standard - but some of the less experienced or less sporting exhibitors prefer to think the judge is corrupt because their own dogs who may bear scant if any resemblance to the judge's interpretation of type have failed to beat what are more typical breed specimens

I've seen some woeful judging by *some* all rounders - yes, they usually find the top dogs for the big green cards but only because they know the handlers :rolleyes: - take a look at their classes and in my breed anyway they're usually all over the place :(   Can't even say that they're going on movement because often they have no idea of what is correct for the BSD :P   They tend to like big flashy coats though - regardless of what they are draped over ;)

>Often what they leave out of their line uyps is more telling than what is placed<

Sums it up perfectly  :D :D :D    Teri  

So all breed specialists are brilliant then Teri?

I have read this arguement before and when I stand and look at a line up where none of the dogs bear any resemblence to each other other than the fact that their owners are all going to be judging or are the judges best mates then I dont think that is non sporting.

Hi TTS,

If you read  my post you'll see I didn't say ALL breed specialists were briliant   Merely that *many* are berated for making honest decisions based on what they personally see as being of correct type ;)  Yes, quite often they (winning dogs) will be owned by people with whom they are friendly - most of the friends I have in my own breed have come about by and large because in the early days of my first acquiring a show dog they were people who admired and owned dogs similar to those that I felt drawn towards also - hence conversations were easily and readily struck up, lines, pedigrees, virtues and faults more openly discussed and advice and opinions freely exchanged :)  I think that's probably common regardless of breeds. 

When ANY *good* judges have a line up of dogs (specialists or A/Rs) bearing little or no resemblance to each other it is will be because that's all they've had to choose from in their entry :)  If such judges had an entry of dogs which gave them sufficient choice of merit in a type to which they appreciate, they will have a very obviously similar line up.  Regards, Teri

There is a place for all rounders in judging.
So to illustrate I'll use fictional breed the pink mousehouse whose standard requires a long head with a pointy nose, so much so it is considered a special feature, the pink mousehound also requires four legs it says so in the standard, although less importance is given to the number of legs than the correct long pointy noses.
So breed specialists will look for this special feature of long pointy noses and over time more exagerated types are winning, the rest of the dog goes by the wayside and suddenly you have a pink mousehound with the perfect head and three legs, and the breeders are happy.
Now if you have all-rounders judging they may not know that the pointier and longer the pink mousehounds head is the better, but they understand a dog should if nothing else be sound and have four legs, certainly the mousehound standard requires four legs. So they put up a dog with four legs and a moderate head, the breed retains balance, retains four legs and is not in any way over exagerated.
In all rounders and in breed experts there are good judges and bad judges, you have to decide which is which, but both are important to the development of a sound and typy dog.
Also if you don't exhibit under all rounders how are they to learn about your breed? One day these all rounders could be the group judge or Best in Show Judge who decides they are 100% certain that the standard has not been changed to allow for three legs and the perfect head, so they by pass your dog and award group or BIS to a dog who does have four legs.

Another thought... and a question.

An all rounder is judging at a championship show, it is your chance to qualify for Crufts, and a breed specialist is judging an open show the champ show is on your doorstep, a mere 5 miles away and the open show is over 50 miles away which show would you go to?

What a good point you have made Polly while people moan about all rounders when it comes to group judging it is them they go under.

As I said Brainless i agree that all rounders can be facey as well.  I have seen a well known allrounder judge at Bath who gave a dog with blue eyes a CC and another minor puppy a RCC I think to prove a point to a dog who was practically dissappearing up its backside it was so scared. At the same show I have also heard a breed judge who is judging in the immediate future promise a best puppy to her friend I have not given this judge a entry as I went under her once and vowed never to repeat the experience.  Both of these people make a mockery of judging and it is sometimes why I lose heart in showing.

Hi Polly, good point but it would depend entirely on which specialist and which all rounder ;)   I've travelled down south to show under specialists at open shows and yet am rarely to be found exhibiting locally at Champ shows unless it is a specialist judge or one of the better all rounders who have a track record of identifying type as opposed to faces ;)   I will give first time CC appointments in all-rounders an entry unless I've read an abysmal crit from them in the dog press on my breed - sadly not entirely unusual :(  I can think of several exhibitors in my breed who treat their show selection in exactly the same way.

I think the importance of the Crufts qualifier is a variable depending much on how long a person has been exhibiting.  In the early years it's a "must have" but as it's the least dog/exhibitor friendly show in the calendar, there are many who couldn't care less about going so the qualifier means nowt ;)   Regards, Teri

I have to agree that there should be room for both specialists and all-rounders in judging. "Some" breed judges get hung-up on a certain aspect of the breed, forgetting about the rest of the dog, all-rounders (in the main) tend to judge for an all-round good dog, but may miss out on something we think is very important.
Facey judging happens in both types, breed and all-rounders. Some exhibitors suck up to all-rounders, and, no matter which different type/line  of dog they take in, still win under them. The same applies to breed judges who put up certain lines, or certain people.
I personally think that it's good to have the balance of both types of judges, but don't think that all-rounders should out-weigh the breed specialists, if you get what I mean! Just rambling, as usual!

Kay

I don't have this problem :d  Lucky if they even know what breed they are judging!!

Read a critique on a dog that I bred this week which said that her coat was thin and could do with being thicker.  Surely the judge could see that the coat was actually clipped very recently especially as she has one of the thickest coats I've seen in the breed :d  Had to laugh at that though I must admit.  Maybe he didn't word it correctly, but I think that it should have read that the coat should be longer not thicker :d

As someone who has done about equal with all-rounders and specialists, I would choose an all-rounder 9 times out of 10. With a specialist, you soon know what type they will go for, and you soon know who will always do favours irrespective of type. I prefer an all-rounder who also judges the group my dogs are in. In my breed at least, most of our specialists only judge our breed and I do not feel that gives enough of an education.

Interesting mix of replies - I think that some breeds may be judged by all rounders fairly well but certainly in my own (BSD) 9 times out of 10 they miss that essential 'belgianess ' of a typical example and go for a big coated, flashy moving BIG dog. Without type you surely don't have a breed ?.

I too would travel to enter under a good breed judge  - rather than enter under an all rounder at a Champ show on my doorstep - after all why would I pay out for the opinion of someone I do not value ?. Unforunately with the lack of breed judges giving tickets this year our entries are right down and we may lose yet more tickets. I'ts a catch 22 situation, if we enter then we are endorsing the all rounder choice - if we don't then we will have no shows to enter :(.

I think that no champions should be made up without two tickets being awarded by breed specialists - perhaps that would even out the imbalance .

Yvonne

If Yvonne's suggestion was accepted (no champions made up without two tickets being awarded by breed specialists) the destruction of my breed - Siberian Huskies - would accelerate at an even more rapid rate than at present. Here in the UK it is only the all-rounders (with a very small number of brave and admirable breed specialist exceptions) who seem to have read and understood the breed standard. The majority of UK breed specialists have been seduced by the sprint racing bug and insist on putting up underweight, undercoated, long-eared, round eyed dogs which might well run very fast round a three mile trail on grass, but which would not survive for an hour in arctic conditions let alone pull a sled for 100 miles a day.

"...the destruction of my breed - Siberian Huskies - would accelerate at an even more rapid rate than at present."

Oh dear, you missed out those three important little words - "in my opinion".

Now in my humble opinion, I can't see the Chukchi clamouring to get their hands on much that's come out of a North American or Continental show ring recently but what would I know as I'm one of the many who clearly doesn't "understand" the breed standard...

Winterwind - I certainly couldn't see the Chukchi wasting their time with a "breed" which had so little substance and coat that it simply couldn't survive in arctic conditions.
If you look at photos of the original dogs imported into the US and Alaska, you will clearly see that they were a very mixed bunch (hardly surprising as the enterprising Chukchi were no doubt taking advantage of the rich US/European visitors to discard some of their rubbish). Some, admittedly look a little like some of our "British" Siberians (although nowhere near as thin and much better coated), some however (like Seppala's Tserko and Kreevanka) could quite happily fit into a "North American or European show ring".
Look also at the comments of people who know about working huskies over extremely long distances. In April 2003, the SHCGB invited US Breed Specialists John Linnehan and Carol Nash of Marlytuk Siberians to judge at the Club Champ Show. John and Carol are closely associated with Don Young's Team Stormwatch, whose Siberians have completed the Iditarod on several occasions. After judging the breed at the show, Carol wrote as follows:
"Our goal...is to maintain the Siberian as a working, showing dog that would be recognised as such by the founding breeders. Hopefully they will function well within these limitations. If I remove these limitations I may not still have a Siberian Husky, nor may I be certain what I now do have or where I would then go with it. Please consider exactly how far from the pioneer Siberians you want to go in this effort for sprint dogs."
She went on to criticise the painfully thin state of many of the dogs shown that day:
"Many...were actually thin and not simply in condition. I have not seen dogs this thin even at the end of the Iditarod."

Whether you agree that the breed is being destroyed in the UK, any objective individual who has observed the breed in this country over the past 30 years cannot fail to acknowledge the changes which have occured. Compare photos of breed champions over the period and the trend is obvious. You may see that as an improvement. I see it as a disaster - just my opinion!

Hi Mick

All the early pictures I've seen (obviously, I guess, as they're sledding photographs) are shot in winter with the dogs in full coat. I shouldn't expect the Chukchi dogs would have looked particularly plump and fluffy during the pleasant Arctic summer months when as I understand it they were often turned out to fend for themselves.

We live in a temperate climate, getting warmer - I don't think it's all that unreasonable to expect British Siberians to develop a smaller coat over time, for the sake of their health and comfort at least. You also talk about thinness/fatness as though they're an issue of conformation. A dog is either well put together or not. A dog light of bone and a dog heavy of bone (and the little dog whose bone is just right!) can be equally as fat or thin as one another. Everyone has different opinions on how much fat a working dog should carry - my vet, for example, would prefer to see my dogs much skinnier than they are and I already consider them quite slender.

You seem to quote Carol Nash quite a lot. Not all American judges are so ultra critical of British/European dogs. Mariah Ann Cook judged the Finnish Speciality last year, for example, and you might find her write-up interesting - especially as over there the judge has to write a critique for every dog she/he goes over.

It's interesting to hear people's opinions. I just get a little wound up when they are put out as fact. Especially as on a board like this, people from other breeds could come away thinking ours is somehow "in trouble" when that's just one opinion.

:-)